Time to throw out the s467.7 turbo choices?

Smokem said:
I wouldn't necessarily call ~ 35lb/min "A TON", but it is roughly 2lb/min more than the T4 0.91AR, and the plural of RPM is RPM.
Click to expand...

You also said when Sxes first came out that the 66sxe and 69sxe would be drastically different and there was no way they would build boost roughly at the same time in the "RPMS"... how'd that play out again? Right the 66sxe is almost unheard of in applications since they have map starting points at basically the same spot.

Speaking from experience on a COMMONRAIL, there is a noticeable difference from the .91 to 1.0..... On both ends of the powerband!

Ultimately it's the Op who has to dedcide how he wants the power to come on

The .91 is significantly more enjoyable (few hundred rpms sooner spool) than the 1.0!
 
Feel free to take liberty with comments made and manipulate them to support your argument. But what I clearly stated was the ability of the numerically lower trim compressor to produce and operate more efficiently at a higher pressure ratio. This is not an opinion, it is a fact known by all turbo manufacturers.

It is very well supported by test cell data that this is the case, but apparently butt dynos are your only source of "facts". The 2lb/min difference in flow between the T4 0.91AR and T4 1.00AR would be noticeable, but again the older clipped design 73/80mm turbine would actually flow more than the current SX-E design albeit at a loss of efficiency.
 
Smokem said:
Feel free to take liberty with comments made and manipulate them to support your argument. But what I clearly stated was the ability of the numerically lower trim compressor to produce and operate more efficiently at a higher pressure ratio. This is not an opinion, it is a fact known by all turbo manufacturers.

It is very well supported by test cell data that this is the case, but apparently butt dynos are your only source of "facts". The 2lb/min difference in flow between the T4 0.91AR and T4 1.00AR would be noticeable, but again the older clipped design 73/80mm turbine would actually flow more than the current SX-E design albeit at a loss of efficiency.
Click to expand...

Fact: Guy it has nothing to do with manipulating anything to suit XYZ..... you said what you said now own it. Even if your wrong, why run from it?!

Fact: You just don't like the SXE line and never had, plain and simple! Largely as result of it taking business from you and other turbo builders, which is understandable.

Fact: Your talking out both sides of your mouth in your last statement. Go reference Borgs Turbine flow chart guide and being the EFR turbine which is shared by the SXE 300 line you'll CLEARLY see where the efficiency map outflows the older 300 series turbine.

Amazing how all those butt dyno trucks out there are performing better these days compared to the flow benched JD 300s.... :doh:
 
He never once said he didn't like the sxe line.... He referenced how the difference in trim on the 66 and 69 would impact the bottom line at the end of the day. It is funny to watch inducer size and the term billet and now the term MFS impact the diesel industry.

I love the sxe line. I have rebuilt more of them than the all of the old lineups combined. People seem to think the 369 is better for power than an S400 so they feel the need to run it as a 1000hp single.

Don't forget MOAR inducer means moar power I readed it on the forums.
 
The 369 is a great turbo in the correct application. I have seen a lot of failures too, all due to over speed it seems. Hence why mine is gated. I think it would live very happy at 700rwhp, with the ability to put down 850 on occasion. If you want more you need to gate, no way around that.
 
Last edited:
zfaylor said:
He never once said he didn't like the sxe line.... He referenced how the difference in trim on the 66 and 69 would impact the bottom line at the end of the day. It is funny to watch inducer size and the term billet and now the term MFS impact the diesel industry.

I love the sxe line. I have rebuilt more of them than the all of the old lineups combined. People seem to think the 369 is better for power than an S400 so they feel the need to run it as a 1000hp single.

Don't forget MOAR inducer means moar power I readed it on the forums.
Click to expand...

This goes back to a thread over a year ago and he knows what I'm referring to.

Id ever run an sxe past 800 as a single for personal peace of mind having oversped a 466/1.0 and smoking the bearing. I could only imagine the potential carnage.

I think a lot of the sxe fire has been grown based off the cost component and the companies selling drop in swap kits with them to boost the margins. Ultimately it comes down to knowing what you want from the setup.

The 369/480 is a fun set of compounds to run though.
 
Last edited:
blackmega3500 said:
Fact:
Click to expand...

You should have your title changed permenantly to "King Douche" Go find some turbine vacuum or something. Or go take peoples money for 8 more months.

This isn't an episode of law and order. "FACT" "FACT" STFU Kevin!
 
Last edited:
Broaner said:
You should have your title changed permenantly to "King Douche" Go find some turbine vacuum or something. Or go take peoples money for 8 more months.

This isn't an episode of law and order. "FACT" "FACT" STFU Kevin!
Click to expand...

Oh **** yea! This is good haha. He also thinks an unclipped turbine will flow more than a clipped.. I should not play into these internet games but I digress$.02
 
Broaner said:
You should have your title changed permenantly to "King Douche" Go find some turbine vacuum or something. Or go take peoples money for 8 more months.

This isn't an episode of law and order. "FACT" "FACT" STFU Kevin!
Click to expand...

The funny part about your "vacuum" reference is the larger turbine of the primary absolutely plays a major role AT SPEED in assisting drive pressure off the manifold charger.

Hint the reason you can run 70psi with a tight single and see a lot higher drive psi than if running same manifold charger in a compound setup.

Get the phuck out of here with the other bull$hit. Nice try!:hehe:

Dom_c13b said:
Oh **** yea! This is good haha. He also thinks an unclipped turbine will flow more than a clipped.. I should not play into these internet games but I digress$.02
Click to expand...

Feel free to educate yourself!

Part 1: BorgWarner MatchBot Turbo Matching Tutorial - YouTube

Flow vs Efficiency is easily argued....

Which reminds me Broaner, how's that 1.0 working........?

Flows so damn well see your looking to step down to a 64.5! Just go ahead and slap an old s300 on since they work so well....

As matter of fact when I used the 69sxe with 1.0 and a 480.....

The math had the 69sxe making ONLY around 14psi with an overall 65lbs of boost. Which means the damn thing was barely even compounding and the 1.0 was flowing too much not letting the 69 compound.

Carry on!
 
Last edited:
I hope you realize that all of your facts come direct from borg marketing materials....I am not saying they intentionally put out lies but at the end of the day their goal is to sell turbochargers and I imagine they would like to sell their new line more than the older cheaper box turbos...

Let's not lose sight of the big picture here.
 
zfaylor said:
I hope you realize that all of your facts come direct from borg marketing materials....I am not saying they intentionally put out lies but at the end of the day their goal is to sell turbochargers and I imagine they would like to sell their new line more than the older cheaper box turbos...

Let's not lose sight of the big picture here.
Click to expand...

:clap::clap::clap:

I respect that!

The examples I use on the .91 to 1.0 comparison is just my personal experiences.

Personally, think the best overall "reliable" SXE charger would be the 66sxe with the .91! Avoid the risk of grenading from bark. Having used the 80/73 sxe in 64.5, 66, 69..... they all have their pros and cons.

Currently in the setup in my sig, it uses a .91! Traded member here for it, from a 1.0 and comfortably handling 70psi with no drive pressure issue. It has a transient spike at WOT to about 85psi drive then fast as it went up, levels out and has room for more.
 
Last edited:
Everywhere you go you have to argue just for the sake of being a dip****. Fawk it must suck to be you.

I'm not even gonna engage with you on your comments. This thread is not about me. Its about a replacement turbo for a 467 in case you were wondering.
 
Last edited:
I clearly sell the S300 SX-E line, and am quite fond of them, to the degree I often tell customers they are absolutely the best bang for the buck out there.

And all three major manufacturer's own data confirms that a larger exducer on the same inducer size will produce a greater peak rise in pressure, and exit velocity will be higher throughout the power band therefore reducing time to provide positive pressure(spool faster).

Regarding the question I feel was at hand, the T4 0.91AR turbine housing would be a good choice especially if a waste gate is involved, rarely will a larger turbine housing show a power increase. We have data from 200+ engine dyno passess on a similar sized turbocharger being tested on a Common Rail engine since January 1st with similar power goals.

Very often I am asked if there is a good online source to learn specific information like what is to some degree being discussed here, and typically my response is; there isn't much available other than the forums, which to be honest any more seems to be filled with either misconstrued information or opinions from people with no factual basis. And in my opinion the lack of real content stems from certain users and their posting habits as shown in the last part of this thread.
 
Last edited:
Smokem said:
I clearly sell the S300 SX-E line, and am quite fond of them, to the degree I often tell customers they are absolutely the best bang for the buck out there.

And all three major manufacturer's own data confirms that a larger exducer on the same inducer size will produce a greater peak rise in pressure, and exit velocity will be higher throughout the power band therefore reducing time to provide positive pressure(spool faster).

Regarding the question I feel was at hand, the T4 0.91AR turbine housing would be a good choice especially if a waste gate is involved, rarely will a larger turbine housing show a power increase. We have data from 200+ engine dyno passess on a similar sized turbocharger being tested on a Common Rail engine since January 1st with similar power goals.

Very often I am asked if there is a good online source to learn specific information like what is to some degree being discussed here, and typically my response is; there isn't much available other than the forums, which to be honest any more seems to be filled with either misconstrued information or opinions from people with no factual basis. And in my opinion the lack of real content stems from certain users and their posting habits as shown in the last part of this thread.
Click to expand...



Did-he-just-say-what-I-think-he-said-meme-25558.jpg


This is an incredible assertion to make, especially given your blatant disregard on others experiences. It's just frankly humorous as all get out with how you live in your bubble and so ignorantly approach things. Everything isn't cookie cutter amigo! Most guys these days are running gateless, or attempting to and keep the largest most steetable housing.

This is the EXACT SAME THOUGHT PROCESS that had 5.9 guys calling 6.7 guys insane running XYZ big singles scratching their heads looking at their turbo maps trying to figure out the math and not doing the REAL WORLD testing.

The whole motorsports world must have things wrong based on this....

A.P.B...... everybody choke down your turbines.

As always, enjoy a good debate....LOL
 
Last edited:
Feel free to show your test cell data of back to back comparisons proving that specifically in a diesel application larger turbine housings typically increase power in the major part of the power band, I'll wait.

And for your information, it's not a debate if you don't bring anything to the table.
 
Last edited:
Smokem said:
Feel free to show your test cell data of back to back comparisons proving that specifically in a diesel application larger turbine housings typically increase power in the major part of the power band, I'll wait.

And for your information, it's not a debate if you don't bring anything to the table.
Click to expand...

RacinDuallie said:
Motherphuckin mic drop.............LOL
Click to expand...

:pop::pop::pop:

I'm just chilling watching the diesel industry grow while this bean counter is chilling trying to figure out how with his cell data.........

Good to see you changed your opinion on the SXE line..... bet it helped sales being able to compete.

I mean after all real world application means nothing these days right!..... :hehe:

I mean seriously think about what your saying Westley..... if it didn't happen on a test bench it doesn't happen at all. Really?!

To think where our country would be if this type of ignorance was rampant!
 
Last edited:
blackmega3500 said:
To think where our country would be if this type of ignorance was rampant!
Click to expand...

I assume you are referring to your own comments, because I have only stated facts backed by numerous data from people with actual real world experience. And I have always sold the S300 SX-E line of turbos, however I only sell the variations I choose.

If your opinion is a larger turbine housing makes more power, then you clearly do not understand how a boost controller works.
 
Smokem said:
I assume you are referring to your own comments, because I have only stated facts backed by numerous data from people with actual real world experience. And I have always sold the S300 SX-E line of turbos, however I only sell the variations I choose.

If your opinion is a larger turbine housing makes more power, then you clearly do not understand how a boost controller works.
Click to expand...

:nail:*bdh*

We get it, you back pedaled in the last year on your sxe opinion.

You've gone from cell data to now real world..... (with only which you choose to see)

Lol, please enlighten...... I'm sure every single result was cookie cutter and repeatable!

What's next?

The cell data in the REAL world?

computer-in-jail-cell.jpg


Wastegates controls are pretty easy, nor is that the point of the original topic!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top